If I understand your directions correctly, you're talking about Green Park.
Walk through it and you appear on Piccadilly, close to the Ritz (Hotel that
is, not Camera).
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday,
Yes, I should have written the two-digit Optios. In fact, the 45 and 55
don't end with a 0, but they use AA batteries.
However, the models I quoted are the recent ones using AA batteries.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent:
On 5/9/05, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed:
How about a link for those of us who have no idea what you're talking about?
Mark's links page:
http://www.robertstech.com/pixel/software.htm
The link:
http://www.starzen.com/imaging/deadpixeltest.htm
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O)
On 5/9/05, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
I understand your point Bob and don't have strong feelings either way. The
only leaning I have is that the 'day' of the equinox makes the reason for
doing it, in some sort of astronomically romantic day.
Harry in 3rd Rock
It's kinda spooky
On Sep 6, 2005, at 1:24 AM, frank theriault wrote:
Interesting photo, Dave. I like the patterns and geometries. I fear
that it suffers being so small for the computer.
Here ya go... this should be a little better (but not much).
http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/temp/red/red-700px.html
Hmm... actually it should be easy to write a program that both detect
hot/dead pixels and removes them. Time to find a programmer and... oh,
wait - I am a programmer! Then, time to find someone willing to pay
for such a program grin j/k
Well, I don't have yet a DSLR so such a program would be
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
A D-FA50 macro lens is designed to be best at flat-field imaging, stopped
down to f/8-f/32, in the near-focusing range. An A50/1.4 is designed for
general pictorial use at wide apertures, and will not perform at its best at
copystand distances.
It
On Sep 6, 2005, at 4:42 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Frank wrote:
A PUG theme waiting to happen. vbg
Interesting photo, Dave. I like the patterns and geometries. I fear
that it suffers being so small for the computer. There's probably
lots of texture and detail in there that we're missing. I
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/05 Mon PM 10:18:36 GMT
To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: EuroEnglish (Was: Same lenses ...)
On 5/9/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:
butter, bitter, batter, better, matter, fatter
mad as a hatter ;-)
Blatter
Nice pan, Frank. You captured the moment well. It would look a little
better on my monitor with a bit more brightness in the middle of the
RGB curve.
Paul
On Sep 6, 2005, at 12:41 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
*Caution, yet another bike photo* g
How can one protect oneself in such a case
I did spend quite a bit of time on the floor with her. It's essential
to getting decent pics of itty-bitty kids.
Paul
On Sep 6, 2005, at 12:47 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
My granddaughter is now eleven months old, and she is, of course,
reading. I started her out on the New York Times,
Nice shot. I find the conversion quite good. It shows good range from
the almost white highlights on the shirt to the almost black shadow
areas in the hair. Good shadow detail under his chin and good highlight
detail on the skin. As an infrequent visitor to London, I'll invoke a
distant, vague
From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/06 Tue AM 04:46:02 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Optio S5z?
I see this as a self fulfilling prophecy. Put a squinty lousy optical
finder on a camera and few people will use it. Since so few people use it
put cheaper
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/06 Tue AM 08:57:10 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Film Lenses on Digital
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
A D-FA50 macro lens is designed to be best at flat-field imaging, stopped
down to f/8-f/32,
Hi all,
In my experience, it is not uncommon that lenses perform better at close
distances than at infinity. Of course, when focusing at infinity you have to
consider that haze, smog, etc. will lower the resolution performance of any
lens... however, even leaving aside macro and close-ups,
On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, at 06:33 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
What focusing distance do you think most lenses are optimised for?
Except for macro lenses, most lenses are optimized for infinity.
Bob
Hi!
I did spend quite a bit of time on the floor with her. It's essential
to getting decent pics of itty-bitty kids.
I totally agree with you... Even more totally than you can probably
imagine :-).
--
Boris
Dario,
In my experience, it is not uncommon that lenses perform better at close
distances than at infinity. Of course, when focusing at infinity you have to
consider that haze, smog, etc. will lower the resolution performance of any
lens... however, even leaving aside macro and close-ups,
Hi Dario, yes I get that feeling too sometimes.
I usually have a pile of tools and camera parts on my worktable that
often becomes the first subject after I clean/repair a lens.
This first test often turns out very nice, when the same lens
goes outside for a better test it sometimes fails
It was either in the general Pentax lenses and accessories booklet or
the manual of the 1.7x AF T/C that I read that the 50/1.7 is
recommended for macro work with extension tubes; the 1.4 was
recommended against.
IIRC, that was deduced to be due to the flatness (or lack of) of the
focus
Hallo, i can buy at reasonable price pentax winder me II, but I do not have
possibility to check how me super cooperate with it. I mean does the system lay
in hand well, how about quietness when it works, ergonomics. Have somebode used
it and use it still or rather do you usually detach winder.
On 9/6/05, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
If you stand so that the Buckingham palace is on you back and go left,
you enter a part... What would be its name? Never mind - my mind is
often working in a very peculiar ways...
Here is a PAW photo for you to look at.
As usual in
On 9/4/05, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A wildfire started yesterday not too far from home (about 20 miles). This
shot is about a 50% crop, taken with the *istD and the FA 31mm f/1.8 LTD.
ISO 400, at f/2.8, 13 seconds in bulb mode.
Comments welcome.
On 9/5/05, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it's not tied to the specific time of the equinox, ie it's a single day,
then why bring the equinox and GMT into it at all? Why not just nominate a
day that's convenient for everybody, such as a Saturday or Sunday when most
people are not at work? I
The ME-II winder works very well with The ME Super and almost all other
M bodies designed for a winder.
Also work well with the Super A/Program.
It gives a good feel and grip to the camera.
It is however quite loud, sounds just like you'd expect an older winder to
sound.
The nice thing though is
On 9/6/05, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Those of use who are digital do not suffer this kind of fate... vbg
Sigh... Don't rub it in, Boris. g
I have just one gripe about this - the champion is behind... ;-)
True.
You know, just with the bit of a white patch in front of the
On 9/6/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nice pan, Frank. You captured the moment well. It would look a little
better on my monitor with a bit more brightness in the middle of the
RGB curve.
Paul
Thanks, Paul. I realized after I posted it that I should have
brightened up the riders
On 9/2/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If anyone gives a rat's patoot,snip
Well, of course we give a rat's patoot, Shel.
I'm quite behind on posts right now, but I'll throw in my belated
congratulations, and read the 60-ish other posts on this thread, and
go look at the other
Bob Shell wrote:
On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, at 06:33 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
What focusing distance do you think most lenses are optimised for?
Except for macro lenses, most lenses are optimized for infinity.
And except for portrait lenses, don't you think?
Your sentence is what
Boris Liberman wrote:
What focusing distance do you think most lenses are optimised for?
I think that at distances such as 5m or even closer the precision of
focusing becomes much more important. In fact, having no special
knowledge I cannot answer your question. I am under (probably wrong)
I wrote:
Among the prime lenses, once you leave apart the macros, the portrait
lenses and maybe the 50mm (also performing very well at close distance),
there's not so much left below 300mm: just a few Pentax prime lenses below
85mm are modern designs (20A/FA, 28FA, 31LTD, 35/2FA, 43LTD).
On 9/3/05, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the idea. It makes the cute girls ask :)
But not the ugly ones? LOL
Two thoughts:
a) The taping or non-taping of logos is a non-issue with me. I don't
tape mine, but for me, it's (how to explain this?) a matter that I
don't want anyone
On 9/4/05, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I spent yesterday visiting friends and exploring the Woodstock
Fair. The oldest agriculture fair in the United States. I brought my
*ist-D and came away with a fare number of images. I don't think these
are too bad so let my present
On 9/1/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/Collingwood%202005/?action=viewcurrent=LL_9063.jpg
Hi Gang.
My original post never made it to my computer and i don't see it in the
archives, so i'll
resend.
Shot two in my mini
Not usually, In the case of the two midway rides the focal length was
28mm but I was trying to get in as much of the scene as possible, though
the framing was as wide as I wanted it, otherwise I would have switched
to the 20-35 that I also had with me. The calves were shot at 85mm.
The 43
I've tried a few and the viewfinders tend to make me yearn for the
rangefinder/viewfinder on my Retina IIc, which in itself isn't on of the
best I've ever seen. Last ps digital with an optical viewfinder I
looked at was just painful.
John Celio wrote:
I see this as a self fulfilling
warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 30c9ecf8
The package boost-1.33.0-3.fc4 is not signed with a GPG signature. Aborting...
Package boost-1.33.0-3.fc4 does not have a GPG signature.
Is this a good error?
Kevin
--
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
Kevin Waterson wrote on 06.09.05 16:12:
Is this a good error?
Are there ANY good errors at all? :-)
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, at 08:43 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Your sentence is what the general theory claims. That's what you
usually read on photo books and magazines.
However, is it true? I don't think above statement to be so much
supported by evidence.
Yes, it is true. Most lenses
Nice to know. Thanks Bob.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: Are most lenses optimised for short distance focusing?
On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, at 08:43 AM, Dario
I used mine quite a lot until I bought a PZ-20 and sort of retired it. The
only complaint was that the way I held the camera, I was putting one thumb
in the middle of the back
for support, and it tended bow the back and spring the latch, causing it to
open in the middle of a roll. Really why
I use it for my P50. It works well, ergonomically as well. It's not exactly
quiet.
Regards
Jens
Jens Bladt
Arkitekt MAA
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: tomecz na o2 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 6. september 2005 14:12
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne:
Kevin Waterson wrote:
warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 30c9ecf8
The package boost-1.33.0-3.fc4 is not signed with a GPG signature. Aborting...
Package boost-1.33.0-3.fc4 does not have a GPG signature.
Is this a good error?
Looks benign to me.
S
On Sep 6, 2005, at 3:32 AM, mike wilson wrote:
A D-FA50 macro lens is designed to be best at flat-field imaging,
stopped
down to f/8-f/32, in the near-focusing range. An A50/1.4 is
designed for
general pictorial use at wide apertures, and will not perform at
its best at
copystand
This one time, at band camp, Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 30c9ecf8
The package boost-1.33.0-3.fc4 is not signed with a GPG signature.
Aborting...
Package boost-1.33.0-3.fc4 does not have a GPG signature.
err, as
On Sep 6, 2005, at 5:58 AM, frank theriault wrote:
That's the idea. It makes the cute girls ask :)
But not the ugly ones? LOL
Two thoughts: ...
I'll add a third:
The only time anyone, cute girl or cute boy alike, has made a comment
about any camera I'm carrying in the past year or two
I have had my ME-II winder for about 20 years on my ME Super, and
ergonomically, I don't think any camera fits better in my hand. The winder
makes the ME Super easy and comfortable to hold. The only downside is that
while the ME Super is probably the quietest Pentax camera (at least in terms
Boris wrote:
A question, if you don't mind. Why did you use bulb mode if *istD has
shutter speeds as slow as 30 secs?
Thanks for the kind words. Mainly because I was bracketing exposures, so
it's easier to keep it in bulb mode and count the seconds than it is to keep
adjusting the
Frank wrote:
GREAT photo, Tom.
I mean, everything is there. The silhouette of the hill/trees, the
brightly lit orange smoke, and those brilliant stars! It's the stars
that make it, actually. As a city slicker, I'm not used to seeing so
many stars in the sky on a clear night, let alone when
On 9/6/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/3/05, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the idea. It makes the cute girls ask :)
But not the ugly ones? LOL
You see, I'm in Poland now. There *are* no ugly girls in this country,
that I have noticed so far.
:)
--
I'm shooting a dinner/dance on Saturday night (9hrs GMT) I'm using a set
of portable studio flashes and would like to set the white balance
manually to the lights.
I've read the instructions with the istD for setting white balance
manually and it says on P142 step 3:
fill the viewfinder
On 9/6/05, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You see, I'm in Poland now. There *are* no ugly girls in this country,
that I have noticed so far.
Judging by the young ladies of Polish heritage that I've met in
Canada, I'd have to agree with you!! hubba hubba LOL
cheers,
frank
--
Juan Buhler wrote:
On 9/6/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/3/05, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the idea. It makes the cute girls ask :)
But not the ugly ones? LOL
You see, I'm in Poland now. There *are* no ugly girls in this country,
that I have
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Colin Miller wrote:
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
While others will make suggestions that apply to film as well, how
about shooting RAW with Auto WB and fixing (in batch mode??) later? I
would not be able to guide you on this either, but others may.
Good luck with
Boris,
You caught me. Yup. That is exactly what happened. I thought about it
and decided to leave it there, with a short curse) and accept the
consequences. Next time I will be more careful. But it is a nice
picture of my head shadow???!!
John G.
Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
Here is
On 9/3/05, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
car owner make their cars as noticeable as possible when they customize.
Usually, but not always.
I heard that there were times, when people actually raced for pink
slips, that a sleeper or Q-ship was an advantage, insofar as no one
would want to
Heh, someone else who runs Fedora...
Yes, it's a benign error. Just set gpgcheck=0 for the particular
repository in question.
-Mat
On 9/6/05, Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3
Hallo, i can buy at reasonable price pentax winder me II, but I do not
have possibility to check how me super cooperate with it. I mean does the
system lay in hand well, how about quietness when it works, ergonomics.
Have somebode used it and use it still or rather do you usually detach
On 9/4/05, Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I just got back today, as you may have guessed from the few replies
I already posted :)
With only one camera and 2/35mm lens, and lotsa film, so if I have any
interesting photographs (I hope g) you will see some eventually.
Overall, it
On 8/29/05, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Took a long hike in the woods and came across this...
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_beast.html
Technical Info:
Pentax *ist-D ISO 800 @ 1/25sec
smc Pentax 17mm f4.0 Fisheye @ 5.6
As usual comments are welcome but may be
Illumination only. This should be intuitively obvious to the most casual
observer. Most other characteristics are independent of whether the lens is
for digital or for film, are independent of flatness of field, etc., and
are simply a function of tradeoffs in lens design or care in manufacture.
Not usually, In the case of the two midway rides the focal length was
28mm but I was trying to get in as much of the scene as possible, though
the framing was as wide as I wanted it, otherwise I would have switched
to the 20-35 that I also had with me. The calves were shot at 85mm.
The 43
On 8/28/05, George Sinos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just a couple of semi-related items:
Warren Buffet and Bill Gates recently ate a local restaurant when
Gates visited town.
I snapped these shots of the Restaurant's tongue-in-cheek marquee.
http://georges.smugmug.com/gallery/763341
You caught me. Yup. That is exactly what happened. I thought about it
and decided to leave it there, with a short curse) and accept the
consequences. Next time I will be more careful. But it is a nice
picture of my head shadow???!!
In fact, I had not intention to *catch* you. But your
In the fifties, and perhaps even into the early sixties, when it came to
customizing a car, one often heard the phrase Prime is fine. What that
meant is that, after the cars were modified - most often by nosing and
decking (shaving the hood and trunk of ornamentation - the automotive
equivalent
On 8/31/05, Jay Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jay Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: August 30, 2005 11:08:14 PM PDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PEOW: Grandmother's Love
Here is another recent shot of my grandson Darius with my wife Sharon
I felt like I was peeking when I saw it... Ahh well..
How do you like the 18 mm ?? I do miss what I had with the 20 mm on
film. I am going to try again next week on the west coast, so perhaps
my shadow will no be as much of a bother.
John
Boris Liberman wrote:
You caught me. Yup.
On 8/31/05, Brian Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all
September 1 is officially Wattle day in OZ so here is one taken
yesterday with the DS + Tamron 90 mm SP and dual flash mounted on a
tripod.
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~sgap/photos/paw/a-pub-paw.html
Click on the i for further
Bob,
I would add to your elaborate test schema the control of doing the
same recording onto BW film, and comparing the light falloff
differences. EV 0.6+/- is a mighty fine distinction. But we can do
better than that with the digital sensor as we can look at the 12bit
quantized data...
I often have the same problem when shooting with the Zenitar 16 or
DA14 on the DS. Given the ~95% coverage viewfinder (88% measured with
a 50mm lens at close range!) in the DS, you have to be very sure that
you are well out of the picture area.
Godfrey
On Sep 6, 2005, at 9:55 AM, John
Godfrey alluded in another post to the fact that there is a possibility
of sensor reflection affecting an image. This hadn't previously
occurred to me, but makes perfect sense.
So that begs the question; is it possible that some of what we often
think we see as CA is actually a reflection
Sensor back-reflection usually shows up as a 'hot spot' centered in
the image field, as what you are seeing when it happens is a
reflection of the unfocused rear of the lens.
It can't cause the exaggeration of lens chromatic aberration that
some lenses display on a digital sensor; that
Hi group,
recently one of the most important german sites about digital
photography published an article (third one in a series) about using MF
lenses on Pentax DSLR bodies:
http://www.digitalkamera.de/Tip/28/91.htm
I thought I'd let you know even if not so many might be familiar with
Since modern multicoated lenses transmit more
than 99 percent of the light that hits them
(1% reflection) I doubt that's ever visible.
A poorly designed mirror box or relflective
metals on the lens rear surfaces would be
more like culprits than the lens optics
in causing unwanted stray light
Works for me...
On 9/5/05, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand your point Bob and don't have strong feelings either way. The
only leaning I have is that the 'day' of the equinox makes the reason for
doing it, in some sort of astronomically romantic day.
I guess we could have a PDML
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does anyone have any experience making High Key
photographs using a digital
camera?
Regards
Jens Bladt
Only by accident :-)
The flash wasn't seated properly on the camera and
went off at full power
http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/20768288
Wendy
Wendy
On 8/31/05, Michael Spivak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Now for the PAW - this time - the hands of the Yemen bride (my brother's
wife):
http://phazetux.linuxkungfu.org/cmsimple/?Photography:Picture_A_Week:PAW_-_August_30%2C_2005
As you can see, it's already on my new home page :)
Any
On 9/6/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the fifties, and perhaps even into the early sixties, when it came to
customizing a car, one often heard the phrase Prime is fine. What that
meant is that, after the cars were modified - most often by nosing and
decking (shaving the hood
On 8/31/05, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my small town, tonight was opera night, as a part of the local festival
week.
I just had to put my D to work:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/859350/show/
Comments are wwelcome, naturally.
Regards
What a wonderful series!
cheers,
On 8/29/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On my walk this morning, I came across a tree...
or was it that a branch crossed me?
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/35p.htm
Comments, critique, flames always appreciated.
enjoy
Godfrey
So perfect and simple, that it
On 8/27/05, Powell Hargrave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's spider season. There are hundreds of them out there.
I managed not to walk into this one and it is quite attractive with the
sunlight refracting through it
http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/Image9.htm
Comments?
Lovely shot!
If I were looking to spend money on a dslr, I'm not sure if knowing I could
use older K-mount or M-42 lenses on a *D, DS, or DL would make me want to
gravitate to Pentax.
One of the complaints expressed when the *ist D came out was the inability
to use older Kmount lenses on it like one could
John Celio wrote:
Eh, I don't know, the viewfinders in the small cameras aren't really
that bad. They just seem small, like the cameras they're built into.
I doubt there's a way to build larger ones. I've never had a problem
using viewfinders (even with my glasses) in current digital PS
I've been using two sets of Roy-O-Vac 2000mah NiMH batteries since a year ago
last May. These can be recharged in 15 minutes with the proper charger. I
generally get around a 1000 shots off without flash and very minimal chimping.
Have had no problems to date.
Kenneth Waller
-Original
--- frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So a wattle is a flower then?
I always thought it was the loose flesh that hangs
from turkeys and
old people's necks.
This here's the wattle, the emblem of our land. You
can stick it in a bottle, you can hold it in your
hand.
(name that
On 9/6/05, wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This here's the wattle, the emblem of our land. You
can stick it in a bottle, you can hold it in your
hand.
(name that quote ;-) )
I don't think so...
LOL
-frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On 8/24/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/Collingwood%202005/?action=viewcurrent=LL_9079.jpg
snip
Hey, I saw her and her mom earlier today (from a later post).
The girl has a lovely smile! I'm not sure if I'd prefer seeing her
In my experience, it is not uncommon that lenses perform better at close
distances than at infinity. Of course, when focusing at infinity you have
to
consider that haze, smog, etc. will lower the resolution performance of
any
lens... however, even leaving aside macro and close-ups, I've got the
The antireflection coatings are optimized to minimize reflections
from light entering the lens from the front and cross reflection in
the lens itself. Sensor back-reflection is an effect stemming from
less efficient reflection control from behind: light reflected
straight down onto the
Because there's nothing magickal about Sept 24...
g
I strongly suspect the Druids will be out and about on the Saturday. They
probably won't be able to get the day off for Druidical purposes on the
Thursday, so that will make it magickal.
http://www.web-options.com/img0070.jpg
Or we
As an
infrequent visitor to London, I'll invoke a distant, vague
memory and guess that it's St. James Park??
Other side of The Mall
Bob
Hi everyone!
I'm back, and have a few semi-recent creative excretions for your
evaluation.
http://www.photosynth.ca/photo/f/wildgallery1.html
I had these, and a few others, printed up (8x10) and am just
trying to figure out how to mat and frame them without going bankrupt
(my balance is $00.75
Hello everyone!
My brain hurts. To be brief, I decided to go digital - mostly due to
some unpleasant experiences with filmminilabs.
I'm sure I'll enjoy an *istDS, it's a great camera. But... I can't
stop thinking what will the next model looks like? - you know, few
more MPs would help me change
I have often wondered why there isn't Super Multi
Coating on Pentax CCDs.
--- David Oswald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any point
for camera manufacturers to investigate the
possibility of
non-reflective CCD's? Or is that simply an
impossibility?
One big question is how much you are willing to spend. The DS is
about as low as it is going to get. A great time to buy it. The D
replacment will likely come in at a price point significantly higher -
could be as high or higher than when it was introduced. Are you
willing to spend $1500-$2000
The only time I've ever had a cute girl make a comment on a camera I was
carrying it was on the FA-28-200mm racked out to 200mm mounted on a LX
with Motor Drive. Just goes to show, size does matter...
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Sep 6, 2005, at 5:58 AM, frank theriault wrote:
That's the
- Original Message -
From: Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 4:05 PM
Subject: GESO
Hi everyone!
I'm back, and have a few semi-recent creative excretions for your
evaluation.
http://www.photosynth.ca/photo/f/wildgallery1.html
Juan Buhler wrote:
On 9/6/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/3/05, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the idea. It makes the cute girls ask :)
But not the ugly ones? LOL
You see, I'm in Poland now. There *are* no ugly girls in this country,
that I have noticed
David Oswald wrote:
Juan Buhler wrote:
On 9/6/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/3/05, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the idea. It makes the cute girls ask :)
But not the ugly ones? LOL
You see, I'm in Poland now. There *are* no ugly girls in this
Well, in Romania the *istDS is over 1000 euro (strange, but there is
an *istD at a slightly lower price. Hmm... faster or wireless
flashgrip? confused. again. ). I'm willing (but not happy) to pay
the price, but for the *istD2... 2000$ (1500euro, but I guess it will
be closer to 2000 around here)
1 - 100 of 182 matches
Mail list logo
